Featured Christ made Sin?

So you keep saying. I take it this is your tradition? Or did you have a verse in mind?

 

Since we are 7 pages in and no verse has yet surfaced stating that God abandoned Christ for 3 hours to the Hell lost men will suffer at Judgment, is it fair to say no such verse exists and this is an addition?

 

On the contrary, Penal Substitution is wholly God-centred as I showed you in an earlier post. Please stop making cheap shots that are, to use no stronger phrase, wholly untrue.

That may be penal, but it isn't substitution. You have made Christ into a whipping boy. We have sinned; God gives Jesus a slap; the two are scarcely connected. No, no. Christ came to 'fulfil all righteousness' (Matthew 3:15), and He did this by living the life of perfect righteousness and obedience that we cannot live, and by taking the punishment due to us upon Himself (see the Bible verses above).

There is only one Penal Substitution, and your view isn't it. Justin Martyr articulates it reasonably well in your post #93, which is the same quote that I gave two years ago. Justin explains that the reason that the Lord Jesus was crucified is that the curse that rested on us for our sin was transferred to Him. Two years ago, you strongly denied that any ECFs held to Penal Substitution; I am glad that you now realise that this line of argument is unsustainable, but you are still clinging to a form of it that is not substitution.

You still don't get it!! Here it is again. 'For as man was unable to make sufficient satisfaction through any punishment he might himself suffer, God gave him one who would satisfy for hum.' This is penal and it is substitution. Christ pays the debt that was due from fallen men. Man cannot satisfy God's demand for righteousness and reparation; Christ fulfils on both accounts. It's all there! I can't believe I'm using a Roman Catholic to prove these things, but you have driven me to it.

Another cheap shot. My theology begins and ends with the word of God, and you have not begun to prove that it doesn't.

Fair enough, but if you are only interested in the Scriptures why are you constantly bringing up ECFs, Luther, Calvin and Aquinas? We are on a Baptist site; I think it reasonable to use a Baptist Confession.
Read Philippians 2:2:6-8.

That is because you never read the OP, or at least, you have never commented on it. Christ was made sin (2 Cor. 5:21). How was He made sin? He was made the very epitome of sin, which is proven by His representation as a brazen serpent. I do not insist upon the word 'epitome' if you can find a better one, but it seems about right to me. In any reply you may make, please deal with 2 Cor. 5:21 and John 3:14 rather than blithely claiming something that isn't true.
You have denied Penal Substitution over and over again until about a day ago, and even now you are denying the Substitutionary part of it.
{QUOTE]It’s your theories I reject.The two major differences between Luther and Calvin was how the Lord’s Supper was viewed and Luther’s view of satisfaction atonement as compared to Calvin’s more legal tone in his Penal Substitution Theory. But yes, Martin Luther affirmed penal substitution….just not your version of it. Don’t skim quotes, read Luther.I would love to (as long as we can on good terms). I’m trying to gather sources throughout church history on the Atonement (which is why I mentioned the ECF’s…their writings were at hand) as well as going through each passage that deals with the atonement.
[/QUOTE] And don't you ignore quotes. I notice that you have started a new thread on Luther and pulled out a new quote without dealing with the one I gave you. BTW, there is a great deal more in Luther's commentary on Galatians and on 3:13 than I quoted. You will do well to read the whole section through.

Yep! I can agree with that 'Substituting Himself in our place, paying in full the penalty of our sin and actually bearing the punishment which should have been ours.' That is precisely my understanding.

N.B. I have to prepare two talks on the Reformation to observe the 500th anniversary of Luther's 95 theses, so my presence on this board may become intermittent for a few weeks.[/QUOTE]
I don't think you understand. I never denied penal substitution as found in the writings of people like Luther and many ECF's. I am objecting to the Penal Substitution Theory that believes God punished Jesus on the cross with the punishment lost men will experience at Judgment.

On a side note, are your talks going to be available on your website?

 

I was thinking about this topic last night. Scripture says that it was God's will that he was pleased to crush him. That God laid our iniquities upon him. But when it comes to Christ being esteemed as stricken, as afflicted, as deserving of death, scripture attributes this to men.

Do you realize that there is no passage of scripture that describes God as being wrathful to Jesus?

 

John 3 sufficiency explains the brazen serpent.

Look, your entire argument hinges on God being wrathful to His Son by punishing Him with what the Lost will experience. Since this is so vital to your theology, surely there is at least one verse that plainly states what you claim. Simply provided and in the argument. Stop holding out.

And to reiterate, I am not talking about the existence of penal substitution aspects. This is something @Martin Marprelate has failed to grasp. I am talking about the idea God punished Jesus with the punishment the Lost will receive at judgement.

 

And again I'm asking for a verse to substantiate your tradition.

 

At Judgment the lost will suffer the consequences of who they are (sinners apart from Christ). You have to keep in mind that the Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the Son. This is what you will see at Judgment (the judgment of the Son by virtue of the Cross).

The sinner will experience a final separation, a final break between every blessing and opportunity of God. The sinner will suffer an eternity torn from everything that is God and that is good and by this virtue will be evil incarnate - cast into the outer darkness.

Jesus, however, never sinned. He bore our sins and suffered death by the will of God through then hands of men. Men considered Jesus worthless, stricken, and cursed. And by virtue of this sacrifice, the blood of Christ (not the removal of our penalty but that penalty satisfied) we are saved.

 

I have dealt with Isaiah 53 in its entirety. But OK.

Who has believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground; He has no stately form or majesty That we should look upon Him, Nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him.

Jesus came in humility, not in human majesty. There was nothing in His appearance that men would be attracted to Him.

He was despised and forsaken of men, A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; And like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. Surely our griefs He Himself bore, And our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted.

He was despised and forsaken of men. He was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Men despised Him and not esteem Him. Surely he bore our griefs and sorrows, but we esteemed Him as stricken. We esteemed Him as smitten of God and afflected.

But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed.

But He was pierced for our transgressions. It was for our sins and iniquities that He suffered and died. The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him and by His scourging we are healed.

All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him.

All of mankind are lost. We have each gone our own way. But God caused the iniquity, the sins, the transgressions, of us all to fall on Him (God laid our iniquity on Him and offered Him as a guilt offering).

He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth.

Jesus is obedient to the Father, even unto death.

By oppression and judgment He was taken away; And as for His generation, who considered That He was cut off out of the land of the living For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due? His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.

Jesus was taken by oppression and judgment (esteemed stricken by God, accursed, as mentioned earlier), “cut off out of the land of the living” (killed) for the sins of God’s people (as I said before, this is both penal and substitution) who were the guilty ones and Jesus sinless.

But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand. As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied

But this was the will of the Father, to crush Him, to put Him to grief. Peter and John explain this early in Acts to those who crucified Jesus. Although they were guilty of crucifying Jesus it was God’s will that He suffer that exact death. And rendering Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring (those created in Christ Jesus) and be satisfied.

By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.

By His knowledge the Righteous One, God’s Servant, Jesus Christ, will justify the many. He will bear their iniquities, their sins, their transgressions. Therefore the Father will allot Him a portion with the great, and He will share His inheritance with the redeemed because He poured out Himself to death and was numbered with them, the transgressors, yet He Himself bore the sins of many and interceded for the transgressors.

IT'S ALL HERE, MARTIN. PLEASE HIGHLIGHT THE PART WHERE IT SAYS THAT GOD PUNISHED JESUS WITH THE PUNISHMENT THE LOST WILL SUFFER AT JUDGMENT.

 

First, if you are going to reference me use the "@" so it is not just gossip. Second, you have already confirmed that my view is Penal Substitution by virtue of accepting it when in the writings of Luther. His view here is my position.

But to your claim:

No, I am not shying away from anything. I am saying very plainly that the belief God punished Jesus by separating from Him on the Cross for 3 hours as Jesus was punished with what the lost will experience at Judgment in order to satisfy the demands of the Law is a false teaching based on tradition and not the Bible. And I am saying that your inability to provide even one passage that actually states God punished Jesus in that manner is evidence that you are following tradition rather than Scripture. And I am saying that the way you and @Martin Marprelate have handled the words of others is dishonest (whether intentionally so, I am not at liberty to say).

 

John 3:9-15 Nicodemus said to Him, "How can these things be?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things? Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony. If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man. As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life."

I believe that the brazen serpent pointed to Christ in that the Son of Man be lifted up so that whoever believes will have eternal life.

 

I did not make Luther stand for anything. I quoted him.

Please provide a quote from Luther where affirms Penal Substitution (not Satisfaction/Substitution but Penal Substitution Theory....God punishing Jesus with the punishment that was our due....NOT Christ's sacrifice being sufficient but Christ actually being punished with our punishment.

I think that you are simply blowing smoke and waiting for this thread to be closed. So prove me wrong:

1. State where Martin Luther taught Penal Substitution Theory (NOT Satisfaction/Substitution but that Christ was punished wiht the punishment due the lost at Judgment).

2. Proved one passage stating that Jesus suffered for 3 hours the punishment the lost will suffer at Judgment and God separated from him on the Cross.

Just do those two things and be honest.